ArticleJournal of community health2016
Reach of the Montana Cancer Control Program to Women with Disabilities.
Article in Journal of community health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Barriers to accessing healthcare for people with disabilities:a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Cervical Cancer Screening Among Patients with Physical Disability.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2022Article
- A Scoping Review of Barriers and Facilitators to Pap Testing in Women with Disabilities and Serious Mental Illnesses: Thirty Years After the Americans with Disabilities Act.Journal of health disparities research and practice · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Women with disabilities have lower screening rates for breast and cervical cancer with some evidence suggesting that people with disabilities experience higher cancer mortality and may receive a different course of treatment. This study examined whether women with and without disabilities using Montana Cancer Control Program (MCCP) differ in use of breast (BCS) and cervical (CCS) screening services, receipt of and follow up for inconclusive or abnormal results, and compliance with BCS and CCS US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations. Study participants were women eligible for MCCP screening services between November 2012 and October 2014, with eligibility based on insurance status (underinsured/no insurance), income requirements (<200 % poverty based on income/household size), and age. The data derive from participant self-report (demographic, disability, and health history including previous mammogram or Papanicolaou test) and MCCP records of screening tests (clinical breast exam, mammogram, or Pap test), results, and follow up visits. About 11.5 % of MCCP participants reported having a disability. MCCP recipients with a disability were significantly older, more likely to be non-Hispanic White, and more likely to have poor health profiles. Disability status did not affect use of MCCP screening services, screening outcome, or follow up for inconclusive or abnormal results. However, women with disability had significantly lower BCS and CCS compliance (based on US Preventive Task Force guidelines) than women without disability, which persisted in adjusted analyses controlling for other significant factors. The MCCP is reaching un/underinsured Montana women with disabilities. While disability status in this sample was not related to use of MCCP services or screening outcome, MCCP recipients with disabilities have significantly lower BCS and CCS compliance. Efforts to increase compliance for un/underinsured Montana women with a disability are warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.